↓ Skip to main content

Efficient identification of CRISPR/Cas9-induced insertions/deletions by direct germline screening in zebrafish

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Efficient identification of CRISPR/Cas9-induced insertions/deletions by direct germline screening in zebrafish
Published in
BMC Genomics, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12864-016-2563-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isabel Brocal, Richard J. White, Christopher M. Dooley, Samantha N. Carruthers, Richard Clark, Amanda Hall, Elisabeth M. Busch-Nentwich, Derek L. Stemple, Ross N. W. Kettleborough

Abstract

The CRISPR/Cas9 system is a prokaryotic immune system that infers resistance to foreign genetic material and is a sort of 'adaptive immunity'. It has been adapted to enable high throughput genome editing and has revolutionised the generation of targeted mutations. We have developed a scalable analysis pipeline to identify CRISPR/Cas9 induced mutations in hundreds of samples using next generation sequencing (NGS) of amplicons. We have used this system to investigate the best way to screen mosaic Zebrafish founder individuals for germline transmission of induced mutations. Screening sperm samples from potential founders provides much better information on germline transmission rates and crucially the sequence of the particular insertions/deletions (indels) that will be transmitted. This enables us to combine screening with archiving to create a library of cryopreserved samples carrying known mutations. It also allows us to design efficient genotyping assays, making identifying F1 carriers straightforward. The methods described will streamline the production of large numbers of knockout alleles in selected genes for phenotypic analysis, complementing existing efforts using random mutagenesis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 113 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 25%
Researcher 24 20%
Student > Master 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Other 8 7%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 19 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 39 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 31%
Neuroscience 10 8%
Engineering 5 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 20 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,557,505
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#6,304
of 10,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,854
of 302,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#148
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,793 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 302,983 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.